Conference 7.286::digital

    
    Heres something to ponder.........let's get some opinions!
    
    
    Analogy!
    
    
    	Digital			US Government
    
    	Management		Senate
    
    
    	Grunts			House of representatives
    
    
    	Customer		Tax payers
    
    
    
    Sound familiar?????   Using BOTH definitions,  Who, in each instance
    	gets screwed on a regular basis?     Interresting analogy.
    
    
    Parrot Trooper.

    .0 would concern me, but not anymore.  One of the things which
    justified the high rates of Digital Consulting, PSC, Software Services,
    let's see, now its CSD? was the weight of the corporation behind you. 
    We had the magic access numbers, etc.  If this goes away, (can you see
    it now - paying $$ for network transfers of the latest kits?) we've
    lost our differentiation.
    
    sigh

>    I have this picture in my mind of a Digital consultant out on site, 
>    waiting for a callback from support, and when he gets it, he's told
>    that since he is NOT an MCS employee, he is DENIED ACCESS to support
>    from the center.
    
    Happens every day, my friend.  Actually, you're told you can have it
    for $230/hour, otherwise, forget it.  When you're at a client site,
    you're calling on the client's behalf, so it's a moot point.  If THAT
    policy every changes, it WILL make us look totally inept...
    
    DIGIT: Well, it appears you've got a very complex software bug
    preventing installation of this product.  You'll need to call the CSC.
    
    CLIENT: Me?  I don't have a technical background!  I don't understand
    the product, RDB, VMS, etc.  Why don't you call them?
    
    DIGIT: Well, I'm not allowed to.  Here, let me explain VMS internals to
    you so you can make this call...
    
    CLIENT:  I'm making a call right now..."Hello, (enter competitor name
    here)?"
    
    							Tex 

    Support is a thing of the past as far as this MCS engineer is
    concerned. In the last month I've tried to get hardware help from the
    CSC on 4 occasions. TWO of those calls were NEVER returned. 
    
    One of them I ended up sending the (per call, with a PO!!!) customer to
    another vendor since they had a critical time situation. It wasn't the
    best thing for Digital, but it was the best thing for the customer.
    
    The other I finaly repaired by "blundering around" replacing parts at
    random (had never seen this piece of equipment before).
    
    Another was called in last Friday at 13:30. I finally got a call back
    on Monday at 13:00. And they expected me to still be onsite???
    
    The 4th is still open, waiting for parts that we apparently don't stock
    in the US. (I ordered both of the modules that I haven't changed yet,
    since I can't get in contact with the CSC for support). I did get paged
    for this, 2 or 3 days AFTER I logged the request. When I called back, I
    was told that the extension was busy so they'd put me back in the call
    queue. I've never heard from them again.
    
    Don't even get me started on the "PC Multimedia Kit", that a local
    customer purchased from DEC, that came with a sound card and CD-ROM
    player that won't connect to each other. It seems that all of the kits
    are shipping like this. This issue was escalated to engineering about 3
    weeks ago. No response... Mr. Lennards prophecies are coming to life???
    
    Harry
    

    Working with the network support group here at the CSC, I can give some
    reasons behind the change, but I don't necessarily agree with them.
    
    One reason is that most times(at least in my group) these calls take
    multiple hours (I'm talking 4+ hours folks). they are issues with
    installation and configuration, not bugs. The problem from our
    standpoint in my group is the problem is thaat Digital sends people out
    on site to help a customer that have NO EXPERIENCE with the product!
    It's not the consultants fault, it's Digital's for laying off those
    people in the field that had expertise in certain areas.
    
    We don't even do that for customers anymore, at least not in my group.
    If a customer calls up with, say, a DEChub 900 and needs help
    configuring it, THEY have to pay also because "configuration" is not
    part of a "remedial/advisory support" contract.
    
    So Cath, at least as far as my group goes, it won't help them to use
    the customer's access number if it is a configuration/installation 
    type of issue.
    
    Is this right? Well, like I said, these issues can take a LONG time.
    That's why our queue is currently over 150. Also, consultig services
    had the opportunity to BUY service, just like other DEC sites do that
    have real access numbers. They refused. So, this places MCS in a
    quandry about who should get service first: a paying customer(whether
    insdie Digital or not) or a NON-PAYING customer.
    
    The choice was clear to them.
    
    Again, is it right? I don't think so, but that is the reason for the
    change.
    
    All I see we are doing is like you said, showing that Digital is not
    necessarily Digital. I think we'll lose BIG bucks off this one in the
    long run.
    
    

     
    >>>    oh oh..I bet it won't take long for the deccies on site to realize
    >>>    that they need only log the call using the customers access number
    >>>    (instead of their own badge numbers) for support.
    
    Hmmm, one thing that *ALWAYS* confused me since joining the field ranks.
    
    Which is it, my access number or the customers access number? When
    should I use my badge verses when should I use their access number.
    To my knowledge it has *never* been defined. Well, someone get off
    their high horse and define it. I am at a paying customer site and
    I have neither the time or stamina to FIX DIGITAL. I do NOT get paid
    to fix digital, I get paid to please customers.
    
    This is just play nonsense folks, only the customer suffers in the end.
    
    -Mike Z.
    
    

    re -.1
    
    If your group is paying for CSC support (ie: a "customer" of the CSC),
    you can feel free to leave your badge number.  If it's not, you have no
    choice but to use the customer's access number.
    
    re -.2
    
    Good note, all the way around.  One point, though, is that when you say
    "configuration and installation is not covered", this is a sore point. 
    I had a client trying to configure their system.  Unfortunately, the
    documentation is wrong (and has been for the past three years).  Add to
    that, the on-line help for the product is also wrong.  To them, this is
    a Digital error and they shouldn't be penalized.  They're very
    intelligent, VMS literate, have taken the classes on the product, etc.,
    and don't feel they should be penalized for Digital's mistakes.
    
    To the client, we're DIGITAL.  They couldn't care less about our
    internal politics, power grabs, etc...until it affects them adversely.
    
    								Tex

Isn't part of the problem here, that Digital Consulting is a non-entity at this
point in time?

Bob

    Yup, this problem has existed for a LONG time!  Too many people
    concerned with their stupid processes rather than being concerned with
    customer satisfaction.  It is truly pathetic.
    
    Folks, the processes don't work!  And customers know this.
    
    As a sales support person who has done a lot of delivery, I can say
    there is nothing worse than being at a customer site knowing I have to
    fend for myself because I can't get "official" support.  Not unless I
    stoop to doing something such as using the customer's access number. 
    Afterall, why should I expect my own company to support me???

    
    
    
    actually, you can always buy support from Bell Atlantic.....
    
    ;-)
    
    
    
    

    re:11
    
     ... not funny.

    Digital Consulting and MCS are working to solve this problem
    very shortly.  We will be sending a message to the organization
    ASAP on how to access the support center.  
    
    Regards,
    
    Ted McKie
    Americas Digital Consulting
    
         

>                     <<< Note 3397.12 by BSS::C_BOUTCHER >>
>    re:11
>    
>     ... not funny.

	Sure it's funny.  Digital has always been the very best salesperson 
	for third party maintenence.  They are going to clean our clock with
	this last bunch of incompetent decisions Digital has made throughout
	the company.  Who ever heard of TSFOing those who actually did the
	work?  Really dumb.  A bunch of number lookers who don't even know
	what they are looking at...

         
         Internal Options support has been decimated, in my opinion.
    I am the last (count em, ONE) hardware disk support engineer here in
    CX03, down from 3 just yesterday. One was tagged as high risk and the
    other wasn't. I was a shock to us all. 
         The pain of this directly to the field will be felt.
    Good luck to us all.
    
    Steve

    
    	Quick comments.
    
    	Remember it took us 30+ years to get into this mess, and it is
    going to take a couple more to get us out; but we ARE making progress.
    Look at this thread.
    	Base note says here is what is happening and this is who it is
    effecting. .1 to .12 chime in and actually add a few more relavancies.
    Then comes a note from the Americas saying we are aware, working toward
    resolution and it ain't going to take forever. When is the last time
    you ever saw that happen?
    
    	Don't stop being active, sincere, and as pointed as you like.
    People are listening - and acting.
    
    	This place is finally becoming liveable again. Just don't dispair
    and quit on yourself or Digital. We all need each other more than ever
    right now. But the wind has shifted and the breeze is warming. Have
    faith, courage, and believe...
    
    		the Greyhawk

     re: last 
    
     >> Remember it took us 30+ years to get into this mess 
    
     So? Are you implying that since it took that long to get into 
     a mess that it must take a correspondingly long amount of time 
     to fix it?  I hope not.  
    
     Fixing a problem usually takes desire and a check($). Along the 
     way there is a plan, a leader and results. The usual 'being worked'
     response is the same response that folks have heard for years. 
     And certainly one that you'd never drag out in front of a customer.
    
     jc

>    	Remember it took us 30+ years to get into this mess, and it is
>    going to take a couple more to get us out; but we ARE making progress.

	The Digital Diagnostic Center (DDC) was in place at CXO in 1978-79
	time frame with T21's.  It was funded by the product lines.  Being
	successful with the hardware, they started up the TSC for software
	supported by customer contracts.

	The now called Customer Support Center (CSC) has to look for funding
	because the product lines are really not there any more, and the CSC
	has been giving away services for years because it was easier to tell
	the field to "call the CSC" instead of training them.  Because those
	Digital businesses do not want to fund their use of the CSC, the CSC
	must staff for whatever pays the bill.  In the process, the CSC is 
	being dismantled.

	Even if someone says that a resolution is coming and fixing it "ain't 
	going to take forever," what are you going to fix it with?  Will our
	paying customer base wait for new people to go through OJT?  No. But
	third party venders will take up the slack - just as they always have.

	Before you know it, Digital won't have a CSC because somewhere along
	the way they lost the vision of what it could have been instead of
	how profitable it was.

	Charles

    As a sales support person who has used the CSC infrequently in the past
    for solving rather complex problems, I've never called them UNLESS they 
    WERE MY LAST RESORT!  SO, WHEN THEY ARE NEEDED, ITS CRITICAL.  I
    understand that DCS and MCS are working on this, I sure hope sales is
    as well.  I guess the powers that be just want all of us worker bees to
    quit.... then they can go get some young kids out of college, pay them
    peanuts, etc.... It ain't gonna keep the customers happy for long, so 
    they'll quit digital as well.

    re .16
    
       > This place is finally becoming liveable again. Just don't dispair
       > and quit on yourself or Digital. We all need each other more than
       > ever right now.                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
       > But the wind has shifted and the breeze is warming. 
       > Have faith, courage, and believe...
         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    
       AMEN!
    
       Thank you, Greyhawk
       

    .0 I picture him turning to his customer, who is paying a skillion
    .0 dollars an hour for this consulting and saying "they won't help me".
    .0 Customer ways "DIGITAL won't HELP YOU????????????????
    
    Maybe the phase - you get what you pay for applies?    If in .0s
    situation the customer is paying Digital Consulting a skillon dollars for
    consulting and the proper share of that money doesn't flow into the
    CSC's (or any other contributing entity of Digital) THEN SERVICES
    SHOULD BE DENIED.   Maybe the Digital Consulting service SHOULD BE 
    PAYING ITS FAIR SHARE OF THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE CSC on Digital 
    Consultings behalf?    Sounds fair to me.  
    
    ANOTHER THING - WHY DO DIGITAL EMPLOYEES HAVE THIS STUPID IDEA THAT
    THEY NEED TO EXPLAIN THE INNER WORKINGS / FAULTS OF DIGITAL WITH ITS
    CUSTOMERS?  IT IS NONE OF THERE BUSINESS - THIS IS OUR BUSINESS AND IF
    SOMETHING IS BROKE - TALK ABOUT IT WITH DIGITAL EMPLOYEESS - WORK OUT A 
    BETTER WAY - IMPROVE PROCESSES.  DO NOT INCLUDE THE CUSTOMER BASE WITH
    OUR PROBLEMS.   
    
    I think it should boils down to SERVICE for $$$$$ as demonstrated by the
    urgency that mission critical and special "Customer Focused Teams" CFTs
    buy/receive.   One big delma that occurs with the CFTs in my opinion is
    that these teams have to frequent dispatch calls to (Product Focused
    Teams) PFTs that do not necessary jump to the same drum beat of CFTs.
    
    In addition to this there seems to be alot of confusion in the field
    and from customers as to what a critical call is.  If a customer makes
    enough noise and threats of calling Bob Palmer then all of a sudden
    a non-paying customer gets the red carpet laid out, this is at the 
    expense of all of the (in reality) higher level calls.     In a few
    cases these situations have caused a cascading effect up/down my
    working calls...  MAYBE WE SHOULD BE SETTING OUR CUSTOMERS EXPECTIONS
    AND ALOT OF PROBLEMS WILL THEN FALL INTO PLACE? 
    
    We are taking about setting customer expectations and we are hopefully
    talking about more revenue.  Sounds like all the people who make up
    the who, what, where, when, and blah blah of contracts will be
    announcing something soon...
    
    
    
    

re: .16, .20

Yep, nobody said it would be easy, but there's no rule we have to make it
hard on ourselves just for jollies.  I can't believe we are going to recover
when we keep making the same stupid mistakes over and over again.  And yes,
this isn't the first time this stupid thing was done.  It's in some earlier
note, but the last time, it got headed off before we started looking stupid
in front of customers.  Apparently, we weren't so lucky this time.

I want to know who is going to get the bill for all the manhours spent trying
straighten out this mess and who is going to be held accountable for making
this stupid decision????

Bob - who remembers his days in PSS

re: .21

>    ANOTHER THING - WHY DO DIGITAL EMPLOYEES HAVE THIS STUPID IDEA THAT
>    THEY NEED TO EXPLAIN THE INNER WORKINGS / FAULTS OF DIGITAL WITH ITS
>    CUSTOMERS?  IT IS NONE OF THERE BUSINESS - THIS IS OUR BUSINESS AND IF
>    SOMETHING IS BROKE - TALK ABOUT IT WITH DIGITAL EMPLOYEESS - WORK OUT A 
>    BETTER WAY - IMPROVE PROCESSES.  DO NOT INCLUDE THE CUSTOMER BASE WITH
>    OUR PROBLEMS.   

And just what do you propose the Digital person on site tell the customer when
the Digital employee can't get support????

Bob

.21 And just what do you propose the Digital person on site tell the
.21 customer when the Digital employee can't get support????
    
    Nothing, why should a Digital Employee and its cost center who have NO
    SUPPORT CONTRACT with the CSC even consider contacting the CSC?  If
    this was an option - you would have purchased support wouldn't have
    you?   
    
    .21 - why would you feel a need to complain to the customer about the
    fact that your cost center is cheap? 
    
    But realistically maybe the Digital employee and its cost center should
    consider purchasing support since they require it.
    
    .24 - dO yOu NeEd HeARiNG bIFoCaLs?  WhAtS ThE TiTle?
    
    ;-,

    Re .23
    
    Bob, I totally agree with you.  We at DIGITAL have been so protective
    of the Corporate image, that we are to take the blame when we have
    nothing to do with the problems, or we are to LIE to the customer. 
    Enough is Enough!  If Digital Denies a service, and the Customer wants
    to know why an Engineer or Consultant can't get help, then The CUSTOMER
    should be told the truth...
    
    Jim Morton

    re -.1
    
    Y'all gettin' a might testy, aren't ya?  Winter must be coming... :^]
    
>    Nothing, why should a Digital Employee and its cost center who have NO
>    SUPPORT CONTRACT with the CSC even consider contacting the CSC?  If
    
    As those of us who live out in the field know, the customer often
    requests it as we have the technical skill to diagnose the problem,
    accurately describe it, and check into whatever the CSC contact might
    want checked.
    
    Compadre, you're preachin' (loudly) to the entire church out here. 
    Settle  down, take a deep breath, and quit yellin' at your fellow
    employees!  We're all in the same boat, we're just pullin' on different
    oars (and tryin' to keep from sinkin').  It don't cost a penny more to be 
    nice, now does it?

    .26, .27 ,
    
    I am not afraid of a little healthy debate, please when you read my
    replies, remember that they were in response to a question and were
    meant as constructive. 
    
    What's prozac?  Does it really taste good with Wheaties?   
    

    
    .27 should say "re -.2"

        I don't like this either, but because my managers have made the
        decision, I'll stand behind (maybe in front is more accurate)
        them. 
        
        Putting myself in their positions, the CSC (and MCS) must produce
        a profit.  I see only 2 way to do that.  Cut the cost per call or
        cut people.  Up until this point, only people have been cut, now
        they're working on the cost per call part.  Making customers pay
        for the level of service they desire, is what the new serice
        offerings are all about.  The line has to be drawn somewhere.  A
        strong customer service denial directive would be the next logical
        step.  
        
        If the last part happens, I could be turned into a believer and
        not just a follower.
        
        Dave Zaniewski

    Whats the issue here ? As a DEC consultant, I have NEVER called TSC (UK
    CSC) off my own bat. Its always been on behalf of a customer (Who has
    a contract) and I do it because I can explain the situation better than
    he/she can. If the customer doesn't have a contract then they do not
    have the right to call the CSC anyway.
    
    We have our own internal way of getting help - ever heard of Notes
    files ? That is what I use.
    
    [or have I got it all wrong ?]
    
    Alan

    Alan,
    
    You don't have anything *wrong*, as the notes files are there for the
    using--that's "IF" anyone is out there that happens to see your note. 
    At least the CSC will have it in the queue and get to it.  
    
    I believe the issue is that most cost centers haven't budgeted for the
    JV of $$ to the CSCs, hence the CSCs "cut off" service--kinda sorta
    like the phone company would do to one of their customers if you said,
    "but everyone else has a phone, but I can't afford one, and I can't pay
    you right now..."
    
    If they're not, all CSCs should be funded from a central,
    corporate-wide pool of money--in the US--US Area (or whatever they're
    calling it this month).  *NOT* to be funded by individual cost centers
    (for the UK friends: centeres??).
    
    Using the notes files will continue to be a good source of information,
    unlike the CSCs which is a *GREAT* source of information--at least
    until they fired 1 of every 3 of them.
    
    For the CSC folks out there reading/listening:
    
    Keep up the great work and thanks for being there in the past! 
    Hopefully our corporate entities will figure out this mess.  Thanks for
    being part of the "functional" team that helps satisfy the customer.
    
    I hope this clarifies the issue Alan, from my angle anyways,
    
    Jesse

                    <<< Note 3397.32 by SWAM1::SEELEY_JE >>>
               -< Issue:  cost centers didn't budget for CSC $$ >-

    
    For the CSC folks out there reading/listening:
    
    Keep up the great work and thanks for being there in the past! 
    Hopefully our corporate entities will figure out this mess.  Thanks for
    being part of the "functional" team that helps satisfy the customer.
    

	A lot of us tried, very very hard, to satisfy the needs of the field,
	you see a lot of us came from the field and know what it's like. 
	A lot of us got wacked anyway. Best of luck to those that remain. 


	Dick.....one of the wacked.

    MCS and DC may be discussing how to fix the issue but it seems that the
    CSC mgmt folks have already chopped the folks that would be needed to
    support the "non paying internal/external" customers.  Even if they
    agree to do the support for "free" or DC pays up, the expertise is gone
    and it will be a while til it can be recovered via new troops and OJT.

    
    	I just got the news at 4P.M. today, that a decision has been made
    at the Colorado CSC that we will not provide support for PRINTERS,
    DISKS AND TAPES from the REMOTE SUPPORT hardware group.  I'm looking
    at the message on the board in front of my cube.  If a Field Service
    Engineer needs assistance a tape or disk drive, or the associated
    controler, along with printer and printer que assistance, we are to
    refer them to call their DISTRICT PLANNING MANAGER.  We MCS at the
    support center are not getting the funding to support options now,
    so we took a big hit.
    
    	I find it a shame that we are taking the most talented and well
    trained hardware people in the company and giving them to our
    competetion.  Once they are gone, the years of experience is gone with
    them.  Digital, just can't say we'll hire people for those positions. 
    It takes years of training, and years of experience.
    
    Jim Morton

    re: the guy who said "Ever heard of notes files?"
    
    Be realistic.  Every notes file regarding a product starts with the
    familiar disclaimer, "This notes file is not an official support
    channel."  If anyone fusses about no response, they're told to file a
    QAR or call support.  No, I continue to see managers, rightfully or
    wrongfully, battling for their organization's survival.  This should be
    real interesting since I'll be a *customer* again in 2 weeks, 3 days.
    
    charlie

    I've read this string. No one has discussed the basic problem. The
    problem is somewhat complex, but easy to solve. In regard to a product,
    the group who creates a product is essentially not responsible once it
    is thrown over the wall to the customers. If a lot of support calls
    come in for a product, the group who produces the product is not held
    accountable. I've been with Digital 15 years. I've worked with products
    in the field and I encounter the same frustration that customers do. 
    
    What happens is that the product group gets the license revenue but have
    no stake in the service revenue. This is the ultimate stove pipe when
    it comes to product quality. What should be done to fix this is that
    each group developing a product should be required to escrow a portion
    of the license revenue for extra-ordinary support requirements. If the
    CSC receives more than X calls (that would have to be determined) on a
    product and exhausts the service revenue for that product, then the CSC
    should be able to dip into the license revenue escrow to fund
    additional support. In this way, the product group has the incentive to
    create a product with valid installation routines and adequate, clear
    documentation. If after a period of time the license escrow money isn't
    needed, it is released to the product group and part of that is
    allocated as bonus money to the product engineers for developing a high
    quality product.
    
    
    In the same regard, if all the service revenue is not exhausted by the
    CSC, a portion of this money should be returned to the product group
    and distributed as a bonus to the product engineers for developing a
    high quality product requiring minimal support.
    
    The bottom line is that the product group must be incented (more than
    just the salary continuation plan) to provide a high quality product
    with minimal support requirements. The CSC (I know this must be done
    already) must have a feedback mechanism to the product group to
    document quality problems for product improvement.
    
    My shields are up...

    
    
    RE- .35
    
    
    Are printservers part of the nonsupported list???
    
    Jon Aller

    
    
    It is, and has been, obvious to me, that upper management wants the MCS
    organisation to run an 80 to 90 percent margin.  One of the ways they
    are going to get us there, is to slash all expenses.  We have been told
    over and over, "The products are so simple, anyone can work on them.". 
    So, if you consider that upper management lives by those rules, it is
    easy to see why all of the changes are taking place.
    
    It reminds me of the movie, "The Secret of My Success".  There was a
    big scare at the company about profitability and a takeover.  There was
    a big meeting with all of the SLT.  They all looked at the figures,
    heard the desperation speach from the CEO, and nervously looked at one
    another.  Suddenly one of them said, "Lets nuke Cincinatti.".  Everyone
    cheered.....
    
    I will let you draw your own conclusions.
    
    Jon Aller
    

Re: .36

Not EVERY product notesfile.  Some products (Fortran compilers, for example)
insist that people NOT file QARs or SPRs but instead use the notesfile for
support.  This works as long as the development group isn't over the heads
in problem reports and there's an effort to make sure problems aren't
lost.  Other groups may not have this luxury.

					Steve

    
    
    
    imhp, the problem remains that despite the fact tht we've lost a huge
    chunk of our work force, and despite the embarrassing press we get, and
    despite the fact that we lose millions and millions of dollars a
    quarter, someone is still missing the point that we get money FROM
    happy customers.
    That's is. Happy customers give us money which makes us successful.
    
    Our number ONE priority today should be making happy customers. 
    Maybe we need to put aside the 'this organization paying this
    organization or NOT paying this organization so screw them' attitude
    and think of our bottom line. If any of us leave a dec guy out on site
    with no answers to the customers questions, it doesn't matter what
    organization he is working with, we've created an UNhappy customer, and
    we ALL lose. 
    If *I* have an answer to someones question that can make the difference
    between revenue in or an unhappy customer out, does it make sense for me
    to NOT help?  WE'RE ALL EITHER SUCCESSFUL TOGETHER OR WE FAIL TOGETHER.
    Hate to say it yet again, but this is penny wise and pound foolish
    stuff. It's the hundred or so stupid needless things like this that,
    when put together, result in our failure.

    The real problem, as I see it, is a balance between helping external
    customers (direct calls placed by the customer) and helping the field.
    
    The problem is not that there aren't good products out there (re:.37)
    but that customers don't understand what the product is supposed to do.
    
    An exception to that is MCC.
    
    An example: recently I had a customer call in for help with Decnet/OSI.
    He was confused and frustrated. The problems were easy to solve. His
    problem was that he hadn't even read the release notes for the product
    or the installation guide before beginning! He was blindly installing a
    product he knew nothing about and trying to configure it without having
    read anything in the documentation(which he admitted that he did
    possess) about installing/configuring it.
    
    The same problem, at least in my group, exists in the field. We have
    UM's sending people out to assist with Decnet/OSI problems, or
    whatever, that aren't familiar with the product. It turns out that we
    spend more time on the phone training the person than we do really
    fixing problems! Is it the field person's fault? No! As I mentioned
    earlier in this conference, it's Digital's fault for laying off people
    that do know something about the product or product set.
    
    So, the CSC is in react mode. Call volume on certain products have
    jumped considerably. Not necessarily because they are poor products,
    but because we don't have the experience in the field we used to have.
    
    That's not to say that all field people don't have experience, many do.
    It's the "tail of the dragon" that gets you. For my group, that's about
    20% that DON'T know anything about the products they are sent to
    support. Those are the 4+ hour calls we work everyday. When you figure
    from a call volume of over 300 per day (in network support), that makes
    approximately 60 calls a day that are like that. 
    
    We only have 30 people to handle all that. We're not alone though,
    other groups in the CSC are in the same boat.
    
    so, the CSC mangement reacts - wrongly - to "fix" the problem, when the
    problem should be fixed in the field by sending the right person out to
    the site to begin with - if they exist locally. If they don't exist
    locally, ELEVATE to the region to FIND the right person. It can be
    done, I've seen it.
    

�    
�    Are printservers part of the nonsupported list???
�    

With printer questions, you're welcome to call our C&P hotline at
1-800-777-4343.

j.

    
    
    
    re .42
    
    Jim, face it. Simply, there are NOT enough people to do the job.
    Not here in the center, not out there in the field. 
    There will be LESS people to do MORE of the job come next Monday. 
    If we continue at this pace, you'll be taking those 300+ calls a day
    yourself...
    (just remember to try and work smarter, and not harder  ;-)
    
    ------------
    
    If they'd have laid off everybody but one
    guy to build the golden gate bridge, he'd still be building..no matter
    how smart he worked. 
    
    We are getting to the point where we cannot be successful with what we
    have to do the job. ... (when was the last time you have the hours to
    put into a consulting opportunity that would generate REAL$$$$
    realtime? Can't be done. Not enough time to make money..sorry.)
    
    Now explain to me why we discontinued the program to charge customers
    for support that they were not paying for, but at the same time, we cut
    off the field who are out there supporting PAYING customers?
    yeah..we know what we're doing....we're in total control....

    Jim,
    
    Seeing what has happened here in the center, can you be sure that there
    is even regional expertise in the field.  face it folks, we have just
    about downsized to critical mass.  The call volume / bodies to throw at
    it ratio will be self-correcting as we fail to "delight" more
    customers.  The third party people which have been gleefully snapping
    up our former expertise are waiting in the wings for these customers as
    they lose faith in the ability of digital to support them and OUR
    products.  this will trigger another round of downsizing and so it
    goes.  
    
    I would really like to be more confident in our situation, but I work
    on products where the expertise in engineering has been riddled, the
    people who support the products in the centers have been TFSO'ed or
    have left in disgust, and there is little to know expertise in the
    field and no training for those of us who want to learn more about
    these products.  Add to that the poor people in the field in the same
    situation and those who can no longer contact us directly, unless they
    know how to back-door in, and I see little hope for us.  
    
    Meg

    There's another shift going on here, too.  As the CSC cuts back,
    tightens up, institutes new rules, etc. the client base is now calling
    the field people they worked with directly.  Thus, we're in the
    unenviable position of:
    
    a) not having CSC support because we didn't budget for it, have no
       money left over, and the cut-off was sprung on us without notice.
    
    b) telling an unhappy client "Sorry, that's your own problem with
       another department of Digital, not mine, so work it out yoursellf".
    
    c) taking our time (for which we get no JV or client $$, thank you) 
       to keep the client satisfied and buying Digital.
    
    d) trying to get a thoroughly pissed-off client happy again.
    
    As a previous noter pointed out, even were the trend reversed now,
    they've shot every third cowboy in Colorado and there's not enough
    riders left to move the herd again.  I'm sure that, after everything's
    completely fallen apart and our client base has moved to HP we'll get
    an announcement of a new "Client Strategy" headed by a new VP.
    
    						Tex's dos centavos

    Cath,
    
    as for the RVLI program(for you folks that don't know what this is...it
    was a program to verify that customers had support on products they
    called in on. If they didn't have support, they were supposed to be
    charged for service or offered to add the product to their software
    contract for support) poor planning killed it. They made it difficult -
    on purpose I believe - for the process to work. Specialists in the CSC 
    found the process so cumbersome, they refused to do it. 
    
    For Tex:
    
    The CSC is no longer an "expense" for Digital, but needs to show a
    profit every year, just like the field. When we do
    installations/configurations, to use your words "take our time" to help
    the field, we are not getting money JV'd and in many cases as I've
    seen, the field isn't even charging the customer for the service
    provided!
    
    So, you're out there providing a service to a customer that isn't
    paying for it. You need help so you call us and the CSC's budget
    doesn't receive any money for it, overall I'd say we ALL lost.
    
    A good example of this is a consulting job I did where at the end I
    presented a bill to the UM for over 30k. He tore it up in front of my
    face! My boss at the CSC was incensed!
    
    I don't believe that we're always prviding support to paying customers
    Cathy. I've seen too many examples where Digital's never receiving a
    cent. 
    
    Oh, one more thing: The CSC did not "spring" this service denial on
    anyone. They have been neotiating since at least last March that I know
    of to come up with an agreement.
    
    
    
    
    

    re -.1
    
    It's a little difficult to charge a customer for a stack dump, DecForms
    error in a released product, etc.  I do NOT help any customer who's not
    paying for CSC support, they're on their own.
    
    It used to be we worked a problem with the CSC, got the
    patch/answer/workaround/etc., and made sure it was distributed at all
    new installations and communicated widely...thus reducing the load on
    the CSC. 
    
    I personally liked it better when we were one company! :^]
    
    There are some bright points out of this...our client base is always
    looking for good talent with CSC experience!
    
    								Tex

    This is plain stupid, and why this company is in the mess its in. 
    Will the stove pipes in this company kindly leave, so us peons can get
    some work done.  I been on two of the three sides of this argument.  The
    customer, and the delivery person.  To just blindly cut off support is
    to shoot ourself in the foot by pissing off paying customers that are
    paying for expensive hourly services.  From my part of the field there
    is no way in hell that one person can know every software product, hardware
    product, and every release caveat etc. for everything we sell and support.
    
    When I'm installing a product, that I know very little about, the
    customer has the comfort that I can still get support.  When the manual
    is wrong, I still can get support.  Don't give me someone who was just
    trained on the product.  Time is money folks. 
    
    The product group should be responsible for lousy or wrong
    documentation and product.  They should also be required to fix it and not
    let it stand.  Products should be easy to use PERIOD. Example:  DECNET OSI
    is not easy to use/upgrade.  Make this known in the installation
    routine.  When I tell a customer they should read a release note
    sometimes they do sometimes they don't and sometimes they ask me what
    is a release note?  They are paying these support fees for a reason not
    for just bug fixes.  They need/want good support.  If we can't support
    them they will get it from somewhere else.
    
    Ahh I feel much better now.  
    
    SO Fix the problem or get out!
    
    
    Keep pissing off the customers, and there won't be many left!
    
    

    Tex,
    
    I agree it's not all black and white. But as Cathy said, we've all been
    hit hard by TFSO the last few years and then lost people to those other
    companies because of disgust.
    
    So, when you've been hit so hard you can't stand up anymore and we've
    been hit the same way(30 people to support over 200 products) what do
    we do?
    
    I'm not whining about it. It's just a fact.
    
    Let's change the focus of this discussion: what are some ideas that WE
    have that can improve the situation for both the field and the CSC and
    especially for the CUSTOMER?
    
    If management's not going to resolve it for us, WE have to do it, even
    if it's "under the table".
    
    One thought that I have is that we develop our own relationships with
    people. That is, you have my personal number and mail node and I have
    yours. If I need your help with a customer, I could call you or send
    you mail and you could do the same thing. This would not be good for
    ALL problems, but some of the simpler ones, where one of us just
    doesn't have the expertise in a particular area and the solution might
    be simple and wouldn't take much time to solve.
    
    It's not that good of an idea, but it's a start.
    
    Any other ideas?
    

    Jim,
    
    some of us are already doing this.  however it is "clunky" and could
    get hands slapped if we have problems, and the people who work through
    e-mail or my dtn have to wait until I get the rest of my load down, or
    I can squeeze in an answer between customers.  however, I can't stand
    to leave people on-site in a bad situation, it interferes with the
    bookeeping method I use in place of a conscience.  
    
    meg

    
    
    
    I have an idea. 
    Wipe out  mgt clean from the CSC. Have us running self managed teams
    reporting to one higher level manager (like Sellers).
    That way, the people making the critical decisions would be the people
    who will live with the results.
    
    The necessary contributions right now today are in DIRECT support of
    our customers. 
    We can move out the overhead and save jobs for technical people. 
    I'm tired of losing bodies where they are needed, while saving overhead
    jobs ...
    
    
    ...you asked.   ;-)

    
    Makes too much sense, never happen!

        re: .40

    I stand corrected.  The *best* response I have ever received has been
    from the compiler groups.  In fact, Steve has my gratitude for locating
    a customer coding error that had me laughing for a week.  And Steve is
    also correct in saying that many of the groups do a good job supporting
    the notes file - I plead guilty to making a generalization.

    Nevertheless, many notes files do begin with the words, "This is not an
    official..."  CSC access is indispensable.

    re: .-1

    Excellent idea, but people better be careful.  What do you do when your
    work load goes up because of all the help you've provided?  At some
    point, your manager is going to raise questions.  

    Gilley,
    
    there is another problem too.  we the worker bees have been covering up
    for failed processes for so long that management hasn't had to do
    anything.  At this point maybe it is best to follow the rules, and let
    the company fall on its face until something gets done about the
    situation we find ourselves in.  However, as i put it, my heart is with
    our customers, they are really the ones signing our pay checks when it
    comes down to real dollars vs shell game funding.  it is damn difficult
    to tell one I am leaving them with their tail end uncovered and hanging
    over a cliff.
    
    meg

    Asking managemet to cut their own workforce would be like asking
    Congress to obey the laws that they pass that the rest of us have to
    obey - never happen.
    
    
    Problems could be fixed if we had input on planning. There doesn't seem
    to be any - at least none in the CSC. I don't know about the field, but
    if they have the same kind of "planners" we have - well, that's one
    reason we're all in trouble.

    Meg,
    
      It's Charlie, and I understand your position completely.  I have more
    loyalty to customers and fellow workers than I do to the company. 
    People ask me about something Digital is doing, and I cannot ethically
    give them the company line, I give them the answer that I would want. 
    The company is cutting services, quality, and products in all areas
    except what appears to be hardware.  Again, I wouldn't mind the process
    if I felt management wanted us involved.
    
    charlie

    I know my 2 pennies won't make a whole bunch of difference but I wanted
    people to know something. It's not that the districts are cheap and
    don't want to pay for the support ether. Our district makes about
    20 mil a quarter. Of that 5 mil is needed for parts and saleries.
    Believe me, our internal cost on some parts are almost funny. We could
    buy them off of the street for about half of the internal cost, but
    thats another matter. Anyway, the rest of the money gets sucked up to
    corporate. If the center isn't getting any, then just where is it
    going?
    
    	The "field" will have a very hard time living without the CSC. And
    the CSC will find it tough without a customer base. It's a rather tight
    food chain. 
    
    	I'm one of the support people that will probably be asked to help
    fill the void, and if thats the plan, lets hop to it. It just seams
    full circle from the branch support days.
    
    	Another thought. Several of our customers chose us because of the
    presence of the center. I doubt we have any thing writen into a
    contract but the verbal agreement was that the center was there to back
    up the individual. I wonder how many customers will see this as breach
    of contract? 
    
    jim

    Breach of contract? I don't think so.  But, the old saying, "Fool me
    once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me." applies here.  Like I
    said, if the field people lose *good* CSC support, we lose a valuable
    difference from the competition.
    
    charlie - who is also curious as to where that Corporate tax goes.

    I am/was part of a DCS headquarters group providing technical support
    to the field and also to customers. I believe my group paid for CSC
    support although I don't know of anyone ever using it. BUT, the Atlanta
    CSC has called ME a few times for help with a problem. So, what should
    I do....send them a bill for my time? ;*)
    
    Debbie
    

    Debbie,
    
    I am sure your management will tell you what to do.  They wouldn't be
    in the position they are in if they weren't good at dealing through
    digital.

    Re: .49
    
    The DECnet/OSI installation procedure **DOES** warn you--at least twice
    as I can recall...  One too many customers and field personnel have
    easily and successfully (i.e. brain dead installation) installed
    vanilla Phase IV DECnet.  As anyone knows whose installed and supports
    OSI--it ain't so straight forward anymore.
    
    BTW--There are still two open seats for the DECnet/OSI course in D.C.
    starting 9/26...
    
    Jesse

    >        I just got the news at 4P.M. today, that a decision has been
    >        made     at the Colorado CSC that we will not provide support
    >        for PRINTERS,DISKS AND TAPES from the REMOTE SUPPORT hardware
    >        group.
    
    Yeah, from here on out, we will only support punch card readers, and
    ITT Teletypes.
    
    8*)

    re:.60
    
    There was a plan (plan?) once that if the field needed support, they
    would pay the CSC and if the CSC needed support from the field, like
    sending someone onsite, the CSC would pay for that.
    
    It was a dumb idea that, thankfully, was never implemented.
    
    

    Just my two cents.....
    	
    	They want to make our lives in the field so bad that we leave and 
    they can hire more college students to do our job at a third of what
    we cost, and at a third of the ability. All I know is that they are 
    looking at our DLH (direct labor hours) and with out support its going
    to go up and how profitable will it be when were onsite for 12 hours
    instead of 4 hours. Another great move by people who are not workers 
    but those who lead (to nowhere!!!!)

    This problem should be resolved by Friday this week.  If you are
    on-site and are denied access into the CSC, for now just ask for the
    Manager on Duty (MOD) at the CSC.  Thye should be able to help.
    
    Chuck

    chuck,
    
    At the risk of being a little negative here, "part of the problme
    should be solved by Friday"  Please remember that in true fire-fighting
    on Storm King mountain mode, headcount has been significantly reduced
    in the center after it was decided not to accept access for our
    non-paying fellow workers.  

    re.68
    
    That was not negative - your statement was correct and right on.  I
    stand corrected.  Only part (I'd even add a small part) of the problem
    will be fixed on Friday.    And by "fixed", I am refering to a policy
    change by the CSC.
    
    Chuck

    >>Jim, face it. Simply, there are NOT enough people to do the job.
    
    the result is obvious. there will simply be less job for us to do as
    customers abandon us. its a vicious circle played out many times before
    in many companies before. its incredible how this company has tracked
    right down that line over the last few years. many saw it coming. and
    said so right here in this forum. but alas, they were in no position to
    do anything about and are now mostly gone.

    RE: -1
    
    How true! Customers are unhappy with the price they are paying for
    service because of what they consider "poor" service. So, Digital cut's
    the price to keep the customers. Digital cuts the price. So, in order
    for Digital to recover any profit at all, they must cust support
    people. After cutting support people, service/support becomes worse
    because now there aren't enough people to handle the business. So,
    Digital cuts the price again to keep customers. And they go through the
    cycle again. 
    
    Except this time, they are replacing full-time technical people (after
    TFSO) with part time college students (at least here in the Colorado
    CSC). So now they can hire 3 people that know nothing for the cost of one
    experienced person. Now the customers are even more put off because
    they call up and talk to NO ONE that knows ANYTHING. The cycle then
    continues.
    
    

    I have a customer, soon to be a coworker :-) that told me a humerous
    story.  They were working late one night and Pathworks crashed.  In the
    middle of product delivery and kit build, this was not an opportune
    time to try and figure out what was going wrong via the doc.  So,
    1800.....  The conversation went something like this...
    
    CSC: "Sir, let me see if anyone is available, I'll try and put you
    through."
    
    Cust: "Thank you....  music in background"
    
    CSC: "Hi, this is Mark (fictional) in Pathworks, can I help you."
    
    Cust: Explains the problem they're seeing.
    
    CSC: "Sir, could you repeat that last part."
    
    Cust does so.
    
    CSC: "Neat! I didn't know you could do that...."
    
    Cust: Sigh.....
    
    time passes... I come in to work at 8:15AM, I already have a message to
    call him.  In our conversation, he recalls the conversation and asks me
    to check the notes files........
    
    

    Denying access to internal Digital people and the continued downsizing 
    of the CSC is sad because it is so unnecessary.  
    
    The customer benefits  from the CSC; the internal Digital employee
    benefits from the CSC; and  finally, Digital as a corporation benefits
    from the CSC.  If these 3 groups benefit from the CSC then they should
    pay for it.

    CUSTOMER BENEFIT: 
    The customer is buying a service so their benefit is obvious.  

    INTERNAL EMPLOYEES BENEFIT:
    The internal employees need what the CSC provides, so there needs to be
    a way of paying for it.  You may ask, "Why shouldn't the corporation
    simply underwrite the expense of the CSC?"  The reason is because it
    will be abused.  Digital Consulting or MCS employees will be sent
    on-site to deliver a service with no training and the CSC will be
    expected to bail them out.  This happens all the time.  

    To keep this from happening, managers need to be charged for their
    team's usage of the CSC. If someone is new to a product (note, this
    could be a new-hire or an employee that has been around for 10 years
    who is moving into a new area of expertise), then the manager should
    train them and expect their usage of the CSC to be high.  Translated,
    the manager will have to pay for the service and therefore be motivated
    to hire, retain, and grow quality employees.  Otherwise, it will cost
    too much. 

    FACTOID: 2-3 years ago, the employees in my District were told that the 
    CSC changed $100 to the local cost center for every call we made.

    CORPORATION'S BENEFIT:
    Customer's continue to purchase from Digital because of our service.  
    Our service is in serious jeopardy, which results in a BIG reason to
    NOT  continue to purchase from Digital.

    NB. The following numbers are merely used for an example.

    Let's say that the revenue earned from a customers service contracts 
    supports 60 percent of the expense of the CSC.  Why can't Digital as a 
    corporation pick up 20 percent and the field pick up 20 percent?

    To me, the bottom line is that Digital Senior Management is allowing
    the CSCs to be destroyed because no one can agree on how to charge
    internally for the service the CSC provides.  If our accounting system 
    won't handle this type of work then it needs to be fixed.  A way must
    be  found.

    The CSC's are too important to Digital to let them be trashed.  Does
    anyone know what VP(s) is/are  handling this?  I think they need to
    hear from us. 

	Grant

    P.S.
    The chargeback stuff has to be completely transparent to the people 
    needing assistance from the CSC.  The local manager would need to
    review  (maybe monthly)  each of his or her employee's usage of the
    CSC.  If the  employee is using it too much then the manager should do
    something about  it.
    

    
     re - string
    
    Talk of charge backs, access, deny access, guess what...........
    
    It has never be told to me face to face. And I am just an every day
    field person at customer sites. I use the CSC when I have exhausted
    my brain capacity or cannot pull it out my butt.
    
    Talk of training is interesting. My customers have every piece of
    software in the world. Digital sells service contacts on this stuff.
    Guess who they come to for answers. My coworkers and DSNlink. I am
    more of a generalist than I care to be.
    
    Oh, BTW, did anyone mention the factoid that Digital Consulting belongs
    in part to MCS, NOW? So why deny us access when we are all MCS?
    
    Wierd thinkin up there.
    
    -Mike Z.

    
         Please forward all complaints to upper level management.
    They need to "FEEL THE HEAT" from those in the field if this was
    the wrong thing to do. AND DO IT NOW!

    Re: Note 3397.77 by CSC32::S_WASKEWICZ
    
�         Please forward all complaints to upper level management.
    
    Who are the appropriate decision makers?
    
    	BD�

    Looks like DCS will not be cut off! It was announced yesterday that DCS
    had decided to fund support...but only for the next 6 months. This was
    apparently due to DCS upper management hearing a LOUD voice from the
    consultants. I heard that, at the "last minute" a VP for DCS ran to see
    a VP from MCS to straighten it out.
    This also helped "save" some jobs at the CSC. Some of the people
    TFSO'd earlier in the week were offered their jobs back.
    
    

    RE: .-1
    
    "Readers Choice" just droppped a *THICK* document into a co-workers
    allinone mailbox describing the corporate leaders, who/what/where for
    all the U.S.
    
    It's a lot thicker than I think it should be. There are a LOT of 6
    figure salaries there.
    
    .mike.

    This is pathetic.  We should not even have to waiste more than a minute
    of thought on this one.  It's a no brainer folks.
    
    I think the CSC should reasonably charge for usage, however, sucking
    ones own blood will not do the corporation any good.  Making a profit
    on funny money is pure crap!  We have to make a profit from real paying
    customers, not ourself!
    
    Make installation/Configurations much easier on us and our customers. 
    An over Engineered product may be technically the best thing since
    sliced bread, but if its learning curve is too steep it's useless.
    
    Also now that your charging me money to use this new fangled service,
    don't give me someone who was just trained on the product.  I spent
    time with folks who knew a lot less than myself where like a previous
    noter said,  "Oh I did'nt know you could do that!".  I've also spent
    time with the person who said "Oh right just connect the gitzensnorker
    to the framelstat"  and it fixed the problem. 
    
    
    P.S.  Make engineering work the phone so they know how our customers
    are using the products they design!
    
    It's Revolutionary!  Don't ya know!
    
    

    
    re.81
    
    engineering should wiork the phones and we have brought it up a number
    of times.  this seems to be the thing that hp does that is the most
    successful and we are most determined to ignore.

    
    	And just maybe Enrico's new PM&D organization will do exactly that.
    
    	And the day they do just maybe many of you will realize that a
    *NEW* Digital is being born.
    
    		the Greyhawk

    
    	RE .83
    
    	In listening to Enrico's DVN this week, the one thing I felt
    	was lacking was how the PM&D structure handles support. As
    	I understand it, the new structure will bring engineering and
    	marketing closer, but little mention was made of bringing
    	engineering and support closer. In fact I believe that a question
    	was asked about how the new structure will relate to MCS and
    	Enrico answered it "the same as it does today".
    
    	I hope you are right (I usually hope you are right!!), and
        something is done.
    
    						Ed
    
    

    .83
    And I hope we contribute the success of the new Digital to Enrico and
    not Bob Palmer.........
    
    

re. .75

>    CORPORATION'S BENEFIT:
>    Customer's continue to purchase from Digital because of our service.  
>    Our service is in serious jeopardy, which results in a BIG reason to
>    NOT  continue to purchase from Digital.

Although the following may apply to materials, there is a certain
generalization that rings true for Digital:

          TITLE:  The relative importance of supplier selection 
                  criteria: a review and update
         AUTHOR:  Wilson, Elizabeth J.
         SOURCE:  International Journal of Purchasing and Materials 
                  Management (ISSN:1055-6001) v30 p35-41 Summer '94
       CONTAINS:  tables
         NUMBER:  2233
         
      ABSTRACT: An empirical study compared supplier selection 
      strategies of buyers today with the buying strategies of the late 
      1970s and early 1980s.  Data were obtained from 88 members of 32 
      corporate buying centers who rated the relative importance of 
      supplier selection criteria in purchasing situations involving 
      routine, procedural, performance, and political problem products. 
      It appears that there has been a move away from price as a 
      primary attribute in supplier selection.  In earlier studies, 
      price was ranked second in importance, but price tended to be 
      less important in this examination.  Instead, quality and service 
      considerations tend to dominate price and delivery criteria.  In 
      addition, the relationship of the quality and service factors to 
      total product cost is a significant element in the current 
      equation.  The implications of these results for purchasing 
      managers are discussed.

re Note 3397.85 by DPDMAI::SODERSTROM:

>     .83
>     And I hope we contribute the success of the new Digital to Enrico and
>     not Bob Palmer.........
  
        I think that that would be quite unfair.

        One of the responsibilities of the person at the top is to
        choose the people who will do the work and then ensure the
        atmosphere is conducive to getting it done.  (Repeated for
        each level of management.)

        When it's working right, it probably should look as if the
        manager hasn't done much. :-)

        Bob

    
    re. 79
    
    Support for the next 6 months?  Then what?
    
    Mike M.

     >>> Support for the next 6 months?  Then what?
    
    At least they are thinking LONG term.
    
    -Following you around.
    
    -Mike Z.

    
    Apparently, things are changing regarding denying access to internals
    for Optical jukebox support....was recently informed we would be doing
    internal support for RW5xx family of Optical Jukeboxes...
    
    Don't ask me why just them, or what precipitated it either.
    WTFK?
    Steve (hoping wer'e not entirely reversing this without bringing my
    buddies back to help!)

    RE:.88
    
    Supposedly after 6 months DCS will evaluate whether they need the
    support or not.
    
    This means that the people that were TFSO'd, then brought back last
    Thursday, will still be in danger after that time. The reason they were
    asked back is due to the DCS "contract" with MCS.
    

     re. -1
    
    and from Digital Consulting employees perspective, we've got to wonder
    why 6 months?  What changes are anticipated which might negate even
    needing this support?  hmmmm.
    
    

    re:92
    
    The 6 months is not the "official word" but something that was
    mentioned by my manager. The "offical communication" came out about it
    today to CSC employees. Nothing was mentioned about the timeframe at
    all.
    
    

    Re .82
    
    I'm in engineering, and I agree we should have more contact with
    customers and their problems.  QARs/PTTs just aren't an efficient means
    of communication.
    
    On the other hand, perhaps management believes that engineers will
    say things to customers management doesn't want to get out...
    
    ssp

    
    I'm in engineering as well.
    
    Qar's and PTTs are a way to justify a problem manager in MCS.
    
    simple.
    

    I'm in the CSC and since the latest form of ipmt for escalations, it
    seems that I am the problem manager, as well as continuing to try to
    assist other customers.  It also seems that there are roadblocks
    designed into the ipmt process, os I wind up not talking to n engineer,
    but rather some sort of interface who isn't really technically familiar
    with products and that some of what should be passed through is missing
    in translation.
    
    meg

    Meg,
    
    Send me some details off line, and I'll see what I can do to
    help.
    
    No promises, but I'll try.
    
    chet

    Well, it's not just DC who isn't getting internal support.  Whatever
    part of IM&T I'm associated with, isn't either.  Found out the hard way
    this morning when I called to get help with an RDB problem.
    
    We got off easy this time.  I only spent about 4 hours working the
    problems and only idled one contractor for an hour or so.  It's going
    to be fun when we have a software problem that keeps our business
    partners from placing orders, or generating quotes, etc.
    
    Did anyone bother to tell us this was going to happen?  Of course not.
    The idiot who made this decision might look bad if it was announced.
    
    Bob

IM&T is supposed to buy software support. We do In ASO and it's a major expense
even at the internal discount.

I never have any trouble getting a call logged. The response time has degraded
about 1000% but I don't fault the support folks for that.

dave

    
    I would just like to add my $.02 on this issue, and I promise not to sing!
    
    My concern on this issue is that we, Digital Consulting, may choose a
    path like 'pay as you go'.  But, to be more precise, a path where
    seeking support would/could be construed as a BLACK-MARK against the
    individuals using it.  In my case, as well as others, I spend 95% of
    my time on sites where the product usage is wide and deep, database,
    office automation, security, storage management, system management, NOS,
    UNIX, NT, VMS (VAX & AXP), hardware (AXP/VAX/DISKS/TAPES/MODEMS/PRINTERS),
    etc. etc. etc.  Please do NOT put me in a situation where I HAVE to take
    on a VERTICAL skill set ATTITUDE, eg. I DO DATABASE, I ONLY DO DATABASE,
    I WILL DO NOTHING BUT DATABASE (nothing personal to the database folks),
    because the alternative would be IMPOSSIBLE to succeed within Digital and
    at the same time meet customer expectations on support!
    
    Mike M.